The people of Syria may be greatful to Putin for saving their country, but they will never adore him. For the most part, they do adore their President. And for that reason I would argue Assad will never be totally in Putin's pocket. Even if he is though, it would be a better place than where the western world promised he would be ! He's beaten them all, no matter how decisive their words sounded.
The power of propaganda is immense. Germans are no different to other Europeans having shared most of their history - but were turned into monsters. The Japanese cut themselves off from the outside world because they believed they were superior so their actions towards prisoners was in accordance with how they expected to be treated (we had a schoolmaster who survived Japanese concentration camps but could never talk about it even to his family) and look at Britain during the Falklands War where the Sun and others demonised the "Argies". Trump seems mild in comparison but comes from a dangerous tradition.
Mild?! He's already provoked one terrorist attack in Canada and by killing innocents abroad and imposing a ridiculous travel ban, it feels like it's only a matter of time until the US, or one of his Trump buildings abroad gets attacked by an ISIS supporting terrorist and when that happens we're truly ****ed. The man is completely unhinged, he can't get through a phone call with an ally like Mexico or Australia without making an enemy, he's the biggest threat to peace across the world and it's terrifying.
Given that he's been talking up Putin for years, no. It's the one that murders journalists and opposition politicians, while stealing everything that he can and attacking other countries.
I'm sure they'd like some justification for their Muslim ban. A Trump business being attacked would be very bad for him though, he'd lose a lot of money and face renewed pressure to let go of his businesses. I hope we're very fortunate and it doesn't happen.
It'll probably be one of the buildings with his name on it that he doesn't actually own. He'll use it to get free security for his businesses. "Protecting National Security" or some bullshit.
The comparison was with Nazi Germany and Japan so yes - mild. What evidence is there to blame Trump for provoking the attack in Canada? I will not defend Trump as he is just about the worst person who was in the race to become president but I try to stick to evidence and facts to make a judgement.
Alexandre Bissonnette was the shooter and it seems that he bought into this alt-right crap. He followed Trump and Le Pen on social media and talked them up to his college classmates. I'd say that he and Trump are both symptoms of the same disease, rather than one causing the other, though.
Even those he doesn't own, profit him from the rights to use the name. If Trump-named properties beome a target it significantly lowers the brand value and lowers what he can charge, and potentially whether they want to be associated at all. I'm sure he would get them and his other business interests more security but it puts even more pressure on him as by no means was every Trump voter a person that would agree with that kind of huge outlay, especially when its all to protect Trump's own business interests.
The guy was a big fan of Trump and Le Pen, who have both pushed blame, suspicion and hatred towards Muslims. They fostered and legitimised Islamaphobia and it's no surprise that this attack, and other attacks against mosques have happened in the wake of Trump's ban order. I get what you're saying but you did include the Sun's dismissive and insensitive attitudes towards Argentinians(Argentines?). It's also worth noting that there are significant parallels between Trump's rise and other fascist regimes over the years, so to call it "mild", is, I believe, significantly downplaying things. For me the point where it became really terrifying was his inauguration speech. Whilst there has always been a lot of valid and strong criticism of him, the stuff about nukes, torture, carpet bombings and ideas about how to stong man other nations were worth noting but not reasonably considered as a likely occurance. Republicans are particularly prone to campaign bluster to curry up the votes but still revert to some sense of normalcy. Trump's speech indicated that he's not deviating at all and his actions ever since have shown that. There's now no mistaking that Trump's presidency is anything but a fascist uprising to power in the US, the most extreme outcomes may still be unlikely but they're very much on the table now. I for one am appalled at how our government has meekly cosied up to such a regime, it's spineless really.
His brand would take a temporary hit, but it would recover quickly because of the increased security protection. As for huge, unnecessary outlays, they're already happening with Trump. His decision to spend a load of his time in New York costs an estimated $1m a day, for example.
Trump's latest Tweets of alternative truth.... US-Australia refugee deal: Trump in 'worst call' with Turnbull - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-38837263 1250 legal migrants become 'thousands of illegal immigrants'!! He just cannot stop himself, can he?
It's all the liberal media's fault. Of course, if you're going to pin the blame on something that doesn't exist, why not blame it on a gang of anarchistic leprechauns? Go wild!
It all adds up. With the NY security he had the bonus of it being before he took office and it's a small cost relative to the cost of securing every single building that's owned by Trump, or named after him. It would certainly hit home more with his voters once his economic policies start to kick in too. I still think most people would prefer not to stay at a resort/work in an office/live in an apartment block that's a high level security risk and has to have searches and armed guards.
His voters don't seem to care about that sort of stuff, though. The wall's a bloody stupid, costly idea, for example.
